There was a 4 page insert in Canadian newspapers this week. They spent money on heavy paper and full color advertising but their marketing was tacky. In large print on the cover:

TWO LETTERS DEFINE WHO YOU ARE AS A PHOTOGRAPHER.

FX

Who needs talent or artistic ability when you have Visa? LOL

-- hide signature --

Jon

I am pretty sure all companies have one purpose namely to make money , which Nikon seem to have done better than their rivals recently. Pretty much all ad talk is banal especially if you are not interested in the product. do you think Olympus,s "beginning of the new" is really any better, or any of the other numerous marketing talk. Picking out one company for special mockery is more a sign of your particular biases , firmly demonstrated by youdidntdidyous reaction to the mere mention of the Nikon 1 ,it's almost a pavlovian reaction with him. In fact the reaction by some here to the Nikon 1, which has been a money maker for Nikon says it all .On one hand you have folk saying sensor size doesn't matter whining about FF users complaining about the "tiny" mFT sensor, then the Nikon gets attacked it's sensor is too small .The fact that you are posting attacking the branding and marketing talk of a company shows just how much people identify with products, as you seem to take it as a personal insult

Jim

Can you prove that the Nikon 1 has been a money maker? me thinks NOT1. 4 years in development2. 60% price drop within 7 months of launch3. the J2 being replaced by the J3 within a few months of launch4. expensive TV advertising campaign5. lacklustre sales within first 6 months of launch of nikon 1 system6. lack of lenses and accessories7. not meeting sales targets!8. being out competed by little old Olympus and also Panny and Sonyliving life to the Four Thirds!http://www.YouDidntDidYou.com/blog